This is an edited version of an essay that first appeared on The Iron-On Line
Although my baby’s still a few months away from eating anything other than amniotic fluid, my midwife has already asked whether I’ve decided how I’m going to feed him or her when the time comes. Knowing several mothers who fully intended to breastfeed but found they couldn’t, I’m not willing to carve a decision in stone until I have experience to draw on, but I’ve made my provisional decision. It’s at once straightforward and complicated: unless it proves physically impossible, I’m going to breastfeed.
Of the many benefits of breastfeeding, the one that sways me most is the amount of equipment I could then manage without. Bottles, teats, sterilisers, bottle brush – on my budget, anything I can cross off my shopping list is one less thing to worry about. By contrast, I already have the equipment I need to breastfeed, and it seems wasteful not to use it.
Convenience is also a factor. Making up a bottle sounds as though it needs a great deal of care and precise measuring, which is not at all my strong suit. Breastfeeding, once you’ve mastered the technique, doesn’t require any preparation, and your body adjusts the supply without conscious effort. And if I want to continue with activities I’ve enjoyed pre-parenthood, my baby carried along in a sling, I don’t need to haul the full bottlefeeding kit everywhere I go. I just need to find a comfortable place to feed, preferrably out of sight of people who are offended by the sight of a breast being used for the purpose nature intended rather than to sell deodorant.
The complications only come in because of my gender identity. I don’t enjoy having larger breasts that can’t easily be hidden, but the swelling is a result of pregnancy, whether I choose to breastfeed or not. Now they’re swollen, I can put them to good use, or I can have them sitting uselessly on my chest. Not the most difficult decision I ever made.
Other people insist on seeing difficulty there. I can understand why breastfeeding is seen as such a female thing, but men can breastfeed too. Breast tissue is pretty much the same in both sexes, so with the right hormones, anyone can theoretially produce milk. I know most men would be disgusted if they lactated, but how much of that is simply down to the fact that breastfeeding has “girl cooties”?
And in any case, I’m hardly a typical man. I’ve considered taking hormones to make me look and sound a little more male, but I never wanted surgery. I was born with a female body, and no matter what surgery I undergo, it’s never going to be capable of all the things a male body can do. I’ve made my peace with that fact, and I can appreciate all the female things it can do as a kind of compensation. If it weren’t for my female parts, I wouldn’t be getting this baby, and I happen to believe that being able to feed said baby using just my own body is a skill worth having.
Other people, of course, will see me differently. When they look at me, they’ll see a classical picture of mother and child, a symbol of femininity and motherhood in action. And within their own heads, they’re perfectly welcome to see that. It’s only if they start forming expectations of me based on that image or getting angry because I fail to live up to those expectations that there’s a problem, and I see it as their problem rather than mine.
Deciding how to feed my baby shouldn’t be a big deal. I shouldn’t have to explain myself to psychiatrists who can’t break out of the pink-box/blue-box view of gender for long enough to understand that gender dysphoria is not incompatible with a healthy pregnancy. There shouldn’t be any suggestion that my gender identity and the best interests of my baby are somehow in conflict. That the suggestion recurs so often makes me both angry and sad, but I see it as a problem with the world and not with me.
For myself, and for my baby, I know which way I want to go. And at least for the time being, that’s good enough.
Nick,
Congratulations! Your decisions to accept and work with (dare I say love??) the body you have inspire me, another man born in a female body.
Thank you!
Regards,
Jay
Pingback: jay sennett's blog
as a parent myself, i can tell you that the expectations of others pale in comparison to the expectations of your own children when they get old enough to realize that you aren’t like other parents. be forewarned and forearmed by talking to your child about your differentness from the beginning.
Yeah, Lavonne. Because although Nick can clearly communicate with adults about the most intimate details of his life, he will become a complete blithering idiot when it comes to child rearing.
Also, in the nearly 40 years I’ve spent on this planet, I have yet to meet anyone who was exactly like someone else, not even identical twins. Do you warn you black friends that they shouldn’t reproduce because one day thier children will figure out that their parent aren’t like all the white parents?
Congratulations, dude! Have an easy delivery.
Great post.
I think I’ve learned a lot from reading it, and I salute your honesty and courage, both in dealing with these complexities and in sharing them with us.
Thanks, and good luck in all that lies ahead.
Strangely enough, breastfeeding is almost a counter-cultural thing to do in our society, despite the traditional gender roles that are otherwise shoved down our throats. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard people, including mothers, refer to La Leche League as “breastfeeding Nazis,” and I don’t need to tell you how asinine that comparison is. As a feminist, I’m suspicious of the medical and advertising communities that undermine a mother’s belief in the ability of her body to nourish her baby. My experience as a breastfeeding mother has been that you have to be active in educating yourself and seeking pro-breastfeeding help if problems arise, because doctor’s offices and hospitals seem inclined just to give you some free formula and send you on your way.
The decision to breastfeed usually involves flying in the face of some social norms (which I think is a point in its favor), and the decision to breastfeed while not accepting traditional gender roles is even more complicated, so congratulations on choosing your path so thoughtfully. A good friend of mine, who considers herself asexual, surprised herself by happily breastfeeding her baby for a year, so you’re certainly not alone. Good luck to you!
Good choice, Nick – don’t forget the added health benefits for kiddo; I’m sure your budget will appreciate fewer baby illnesses.
Don’t be surprised if breastfeeding is difficult/painful the first few weeks, it becomes second nature pretty quickly.
Frankly I never liked my breasts until I started breastfeeding. Once I did, I started to appreciate how useful they were. Now I’m just back to the unused lumps o’ mammary tissue.
Q Grrl, I don’t think you’re being very fair about a piece of reasonable and well-intentioned advice. lavonne never suggested not reproducing, only being open and upfront about my differences from the word go.
Hm. You are more reasonable than I, no? I just assumed a tone of disapproval, and I simply cannot imagine you being unprepared for talking to your child about your life.
Sorry for jumping any figurative guns.
FWIW, I’m male, I’m not trans, I have two kids, and I *so* wish I could have breastfed them.
For myself, and for my baby, I know which way I want to go. And at least for the time being, that’s good enough.
Good choice – and, under the circumstances, a very courageous one. Congratulations.
If you do have difficulty breast-feeding, or find it painful, there are apparently some techniques that can help – I recall reading about one woman who was suffering really horrifying pain – which was avoided by simply altering the angle of tit to mouth just the least bit.
i think you’re a great example of how masculine people can love and care for kids just like feminine people. it makes me happy.
i would warn, though, that unless you never take more than 4 (or less in the beginning) hours away from the baby for the first 18 months (or however long you breastfeed) you probably will at sometime have to deal with a breastpump and bottles. but the person you leave the baby with would have to deal with the bottles! and you might be able to borrow the necessary things from a midwife or leche league group. hopefully you won’t have to deal with this, though.
but it’s amazing how many people think breastfeeding is gross- a woman at a wedding dress shop told my friend she’d certainly breastfeed after she saw how fast breastfeeding moms lose weight, and then wouldn’t let her feed the baby in public. in a woman’s dress shop.
i’ve always been pro-breastfeeding (although i don’t have kids) but when my friend asked me if i’d think about getting myself to lactate to help her out (i was babysitting everyday) i really had to examine my own ideas about it. in the community i’m in, people are starting a breastmilk bank, which i think is a really good idea, whether you’re on the not-enough- or too-much-milk end. i think it could help a lot of parents.
anyway, i wish you the best!
Neverending problem with that outside world crap. Kudos for being wiser.
One of the things that makes me happy right now is the number of us who are learning to be flexible with ourselves and the personal meanings of our identities, even while we build ourselves into proud and strongly identified whatever-we-ares. The confidence to be able to say, “screw you, world, I’ll be exactly who/what/how I feel I should, and that can be as flexible as I want” has been a long time coming, at least in any broad sense.
Random copper coinage. Mostly just wanted to say way to go and best of luck.
It is strange to think that some folks can find something negative in the most basic and nurturing things that a parent can do for their children. How is it that women can be objectified and leered at for their breasts by men without thinking what this says about their motives, and anyone take a second thought at judging a desire to give the very most of themselves for their child?
One of the most beneficial aspects of breastfeeding that my wife and I observed (during and after the fact) is the intimacy that she shared with our babies (and it stimulated in me) when she was breastfeeding our kids. (We both feel they are the better for it.)
I get angry at the thought that you might be judged by either someone else or your kids, your identity is yours, period… who’s business is it? The fact is kids can and usually do judge the parents and find something to rebel against. My kids are for the most part pretty darn cool, however my daughter can really be self centered and a pill when she wants. (She will outgrow this we hope!) Your kids will probably be grateful that you care enough to think about how to do the right things by them, and being available. (Like breast feeding.) Part of that has to be about being who you are; just about anyone with any sense would rather have someone real and available for a parent, as opposed to an unavailable fake.
Enjoy the moments, they go by fast. I admire your fidelity to your self. Blessings.
Or, as another genderfluid parent advised me, “Your kids wil occasionally be embarrassed by you whatever you’re like, so just be yourself.”
Nick, like anything it’s a personal decision, and once you’re informed about the pros and cons each way, assuming you’re a rational adult, it should be your choice alone. These days it isn’t like you would be choosing to feed your kid koolaid and soda, (tho there are ignorant people who do this sort of thing still!!!) or dope your kid by putting brandy in his/her bottle (this used to be common in the 19th century, to drug kids insensible with alcohol pre-Ritalin, even crying babies, with a cloth teat dipped in liquor.) And yes, of course there are pros and cons to breastfeeding, just like everything else. Nature doesn’t always work right.
But here is some background for why people get so het up over breastfeeding, and defensive of it: it’s tied in with misogyny and capitalism, The Man stomping on the poor and women. Back at the beginnig of the last century, the whole “ew, bodies squicky and gross! This is the machine age, let everything be sterile and sanitized” meme was almost unbelievable. One example of this was the media pushing bottle feeding as the “modern” and “medically correct” thing to do, if you were a good mother.
Of course, this was ALSO being pushed heavily by the food corporations who saw this as a great way to increas their profits. Children’s health be damned. (They also did this, even later, in third-world countries, leading to much sickness and neonatal death there.) Because the formulas weren’t adequate back then, and they contained a lot of sugars but not the right nutrients, and of course the immunities in colustrum weren’t there.
So doctors and nurses in hospitals, even in the 60s, wouldn’t even allow new mothers o breastfeed as an option, often. Bad mother, no biscuit! It was an angry rebellion on the part of all those “dirty hippie” types in the 60s and 70s that took back that right, and pushed for less sterile, hostile birthing environments generally. Now, we take that for granted. But I remember when my own mother and her friends were fighting for that right, to nurse in public, to nurse at all, and to not be treated like animals during the birthing process generally.
At the same time, it doesn’t work for everyone, some people have health issues, some haven’t got enough milk, it ALSO used to be routine in the old days to outsource breastfeeding to wetnurses, if you couldn’t physically do it, afford to take time off from work (yes there were lots of working women blue-collar in the days of the Industrial revolution!) or didn’t want to (aristocratic women rarely nursed their own kids.) Nowdays formula is safe, at least in first-world countries with clean water, and so it shouldn’t be a moral issue if/when you decide to bottle-feed.
I guess what I’m trying to say is, you shouldn’t even *have* to go into your gender identity with them, it’s none of their business. But people love to pry and judge, on all kinds of things, like what sorts of shoes you wear (Birks! what are you, a dirty hippy?) or whether or not you drink coffee or tea (Caffeine’s unhealthy! Tea’s unAmerican!) yes I have heard both of these…
You might also enjoy the book “City of Bones” by Martha Wells – in it, the hero belongs to a race of bioengineered humans who were designed so that either parent could choose to incubate and give birth. Unlike most mpreg stories, it’s a) plausible, and b) relevant to the plot.
The “breast feeding” acceptance/hatred debate goes pretty far on both sides. I feel quite strongly that too much emphasis on breastfeeding as being “the only, the best food and anything else is cruel and selfish” is also hurtful to women. As is the idea that forumla is the only way. We need to learn, as a society, that one description/situation does not fit everyone. While BF is certainly the most economical, the other benefits are overrated (spoken in confidence to me by a surgeon friend).
Breastfeeding is easy for some women, difficult for some, and impossible for others. Do give it a good chance, think in advance about what reasonable expectations are, and make a contingency plan (possibly in consultation with your caregiver). You might not use the plan but it might provide you with benchmarks to decide (in a sleep-deprived state) what course of action to take to make sure you and the baby stay healthy.
But remember, the only real important thing is a healthy baby and a sane mommy. Do whatever you have to to get there.
Most likely, if Nick goes back to work she’ll end up using both breast and bottle.
This is meant to be practical, not judgmental:
I breast fed two babies for 10 months each, plan to breast feed the one on the way, and can tell you that bf’ing is definitely practical, natural and oh so convenient — so long as you don’t have to go back to work. At that point, you need a plan, specifically, a really good pump and a rather stalwart and very unembarrassed sense of self. Because people will know that you are sitting in your office pumping (if you are lucky enough to have an office with an actual door). You also need bottles for storing milk, and delivering it through your alternative caregiver. You don’t, however, need to measure and mix formula, but sometimes that does end up being easier, at least for the caregiver, but rest easy, if she/he has a lot of experience it won’t be nearly as complicated for them as it might be for you. And DEFINITELY use the powder, it’s much cheaper.
Breast is best, but it must be said that, like a lot of other things that are “best,” for instance, exercising one hour every day or eating nothing but organic foods, it is foolish and often cruel to make the “best” the enemy of the better. Some mothers who go back to work simply can’t overcome the logistics of continuing to breast feed and many if not most women are given minimal if any breast feeding support. Lactation consultants are not trawling the halls of the average public hospital. To ignore the social, cultural and economic factors that must exist in the U.S., at least, in order to fully enable successful long-term breastfeeding is to assume need, poverty and lack of education out of existence. It is as insulting for a left of center mom to sniff her nose at bottle feeding as it is for a right of center mom to sniff her nose at working mothers.
“To ignore the social, cultural and economic factors that must exist in the U.S., at least, in order to fully enable successful long-term breastfeeding is to assume need, poverty and lack of education out of existence.”
Barbara, what a great observation!
Yet another opportunity to show the need for more time and money going into the Public Education/Healthcare system. (As well as greater flexibility for new parents desiring to stay home longer or providing childcare at the work space.) Blessings.
Barbara and wookir are spot on.
I have four kids, all breast-later-formula-fed (with one still in that stage). Both have their pros & cons. You don’t need a sterilizer or bottle brush, just a good dishwasher will do fine (or use the disposable sort of bottles [liners]). A quality breastpump will be your friend, if you return to work and decide to continue bf. Hospitals often rent them or you can buy them. If or when you use formula, powder is much cheaper and easy to use (it comes w/a pre-measured scoop). Barring any special nutritional needs (i.e., hypoallergenic), store brand formula works just as well as the name brands. Any way you go, the mostly liquid-diet phase is so very short in comparison to the stage where they eat “regular people food”. Establishing good eating habits early on with that has a longer lasting imact overall.
This is the first time I’ve come to this site, so forgive me if I’m a bit confused about your gender or gender identity Nick.
However, there’s nothing confusing to me about breastfeeding. It was one of the best experiences of my life.
I’ve skimmed the posts above and they contain lots of good, practical information. All I can add is that it isn’t necessarily easy or comfortable at first, but the best advice I got was to give it your all for six weeks and the technical problems will resolve. If you do have questions and/or problems, go beyond the hospital and nurses for answers. Go to La Leche League or find a lactation consultant. It will be well worth it.
I breastfed my first child for 8 months. I had to stop because I had to start taking medication that would have travelled through my breast milk and harmed the baby. I cried the first time I gave him a bottle of formula. BTW, I started giving him bottles of pumped milk from time to time, starting at around 5 weeks. Five weeks is a good time to start the bottle and avoid nipple confusion. Since I was working freelance, there were days when he was exclusively fed from the breast (at home, in public, wherever and whenever) and other days when I pumped at work and he got the breast milk from a bottle at home.
I breastfed my second child til abut ten months. He got bored and weaned himself. Hey, it takes all kinds. BTW, he now wants to become a chef. I don’t think there’s any connection.
Good luck with the birth of your baby and breastfeeding. I don’t see myself as a breastfeeding nazi, but given the choice between convenience and a healthier mom and baby through breastfeeding and bottles, sterilizing, a greater risk of ear infections and allergies with bottle feeding, the choice seemed clear to me.
What they said about your positive approach to this, Nick.
Not to pick nits, but the Wikipedia article on “male lactation” isn’t exactly persuasive that men can breastfeed just like women.
Because they can’t.
And in any case, I’m hardly a typical man. I’ve considered taking hormones to make me look and sound a little more male, but I never wanted surgery. I was born with a female body, and no matter what surgery I undergo, it’s never going to be capable of all the things a male body can do.
“Hardly a typical man”? I’m not sure I understand what’s going on here. If you have a “female body,” then you’re a female, certainly as far as breastfeeding is concerned. If your brain feels that it is “male” (and I’m not sure how this occurs without feeding into stereotypes about what it means to be “male”), it wouldn’t have any effect on breastfeeding. Nor is it the least bit relevant to refer to speculation about whether genuine males could theoretically breastfeed.
I didn’t intend it to prove that, just back up my assertion that the anatomy is more or less the same and men are physiologically capable of lactating.
I was responding to suggestions (not made here) that breastfeeding would somehow unbalance me psychologically because I prefer to consider myself as male. Whether or not bio males can theoretically breastfeed is very relevant to the question of whether a trans man should have his manhood undermined by making that choice.
OK, I think that I (just barely) understand.
Perhaps this is off-topic, but how do these perceptions work apart from gender stereotypes? In other words, a woman says, “My brain feels that it’s male.” Or (something I’ve heard before), “I felt male even as a child.” I’m genuinely curious: What does that even mean? That the brain feels too “aggressive” to be a girl’s? Not interested in dolls? Not “touchy-feely”? Those sorts of things are mentioned sometimes, but they all depend on viewing certain stereotypes as a necessary part of a female’s identity.
Hope I’m not intruding, but it just was very confusing to read an account of someone claiming to be male who is also pregnant. My first reaction was, “Whoa, that must be a serious typo there,” and then, “Wait a minute, that’s not humanly possible,” and then finally, “There seems to be some cognitive dissonance here.”
It’s a valid question, but unfortunately it’s very hard to give a straightforward answer to it. I’ve heard stories of transmen whose brains effectively insist that they ought to have a penis – their mental body map doesn’t fit what their body is really like. They’re the ones who typically say they “always felt male”.
Other people, like me, can’t really define what it means to have a male identity as opposed to a female one. I don’t think it’s purely about not wanting to confront the sexism women have to face in society, but I can’t articulate what else is going on there. And if feminists could bring about a non-sexist, gender-role-free utopia, I honestly don’t know whether I’d still need to define myself as male.
Niels –
There’s no dissonance here hon, not really … where there is dissonance is rather that western conceptions of gender root it fairly solidly in sex, and as a biological dualism, unchangeable and inflexible … whereas gender is far more complex, fluid and problematic than that.
Leaving the question of the mutablity of sex as a biological construct aside (although it’s certainly pertinent, as there are WAY more than just two sexes, and our very understanding of what biology means is socially constructed and culturally specific) one needs to view gender as decoupled from sex.
What this means is that someone that is physically one sex, may identify as another gender (I’m sure you’re aware of this right? I’ve got a number of friends that are such). However, that is only the start of things, as one also must see the gender possibilities are not just two, and moreover as masculinity and feminity as not just different ends of a spectrum, but rather each being a spectrum in their own right, whereby an individual can position themselves anywhere along each in terms of how one expresses one’s gender (for instance, one may identify as a man with a high level of masculinity, but another person may identify as a woman, but yet with precisely the same amount of masculinity).
Further complicating this is while we decouple gender from sex as a starting point, we must also recognise that in our culture we can hardly disregard the body in how we ariculate identity as it is intrinsically intertwined. Hence how the body is presented, constructed, and conversely constructs us and effects our identities, one needs to take into consideration.
For Nick (though realise this is merely my interpretation of what he is saying, and he may disagree with me) the cultural meanings surrounding a lactating/pregnant body, and his presentation as a man, means his masculinities and feminities come into flux, and so instead of retreating into stereotypical forms of masculinity in order to find a more stable gendered grounding, he is instead reworking masculinity in order that him being a man who is breatfeeding his child is perfectly reasonable and coherent. I personally am awed by this and the surity of identity this reveals in Nick. There’s not a lot of people that instead of reasserting traditional gender norms to deal with social gender dissonanc, chose rather to rework how masculinity is itself performed. That takes some serious gonads.
Of course, this is coming from a non-trans gender/sexuality theorist, so please don’t think I am speaking for the trans peeps here, and especially not Nick. But at least that’s a start on how I conceptualise gender and sex complexities (don’t get me started on how sexuality and cultural narratives enter into all this).
Right, I’ll shut up now and stop with academic mode :)
I didn’t intend it to prove that, just back up my assertion that the anatomy is more or less the same and men are physiologically capable of lactating.
The anatomy is similar, but male lactation is not as physiologically easy as that article suggests. Which doesn’t have much to do with your main point, I know.
The prospect of male lactation is limited by the absence of significant breast tissue. Even women who are very small breasted can have difficulty breastfeeding (and I am talking about true physiologic outliers, not just those who perceive themselves to be small). It isn’t just the hormones that matter, it also depends on the number of ducts and the presence of sufficient breast tissue.
Sarah,
Again, your ability to express concepts is amazing.
What I get from this (simply put) is that finding the path for many of us in our identities is highly individualistic and almost always difficult. (Duh! I would not go back to puberty for anything.) The pressures to conform to a predetermined status while easing it for some makes things much more difficult for others; all the more reason to ease up on the stereotypes, and learn from brave souls like Nick that share their experience on this realm where anyone can respond, or ask questions (possibly in hurtful ways.) It is empowering to learn and appreciate the diversity among the people in our community, and how that in-forms one to see things from broader perspectives, resolving and enriching all of our experiences of who we collectively are.
Thank you Nick and the others for sharing yourselves. Blessings.
Sarah,
“(don’t get me started on how sexuality and cultural narratives enter into all this).” Where and when do we get to hear this?
>>Perhaps this is off-topic, but how do these perceptions work apart from gender stereotypes? In other words, a woman says, “My brain feels that it’s male.” Or (something I’ve heard before), “I felt male even as a child.” I’m genuinely curious: What does that even mean? That the brain feels too “aggressive” to be a girl’s? Not interested in dolls? Not “touchy-feely”? Those sorts of things are mentioned sometimes, but they all depend on viewing certain stereotypes as a necessary part of a female’s identity.
Hope I’m not intruding, but it just was very confusing to read an account of someone claiming to be male who is also pregnant. My first reaction was, “Whoa, that must be a serious typo there,” and then, “Wait a minute, that’s not humanly possible,” and then finally, “There seems to be some cognitive dissonance here.” >>
Ha! The first paragraph is all about how sexist stereotypes _must_ inform transpeople’s conceptions of themselves as gendered people apart from the gender assigned at birth, and how ridiculous that is. The second paragraph is all about how you are married to those same ideas yourself–it’s “cognitive dissonance” to believe otherwise.
The answer, from what I’ve heard and experienced, is none of the above. Given that Nick’s original post was all about how Nick’s gender identity is neither compromised nor emasculated by breastfeeding, you should have guessed that Nick’s gender identity would not likely be built on such a simplistic model. As Sarah suggested, it’s hard to explain in a society where there really _isn’t_ any recognized component of gender besides assigned sex and a whole heap of sexist beliefs about what men and women can and cannot do. No one is allowed to have a gender that isn’t instantly recognizable and easily understood. Transpeople, like non-transpeople, build their identities through a lifelong process of sorting and learning; we are all individual people, and we cannot be reduced to a single cause.
Um, Piny, you’re not quite getting the point.
My first paragraph was about the fact that in my experience (which is limited), transgendered people sometimes say things like, “I wasn’t interested in rough play with the other boys,” or “I wasn’t interested in dresses and dolls,” etc., in service of explaining that they knew as children that their “identity” was somehow screwed up. This is all very tentative on my part, but it seems to be that this thinking depends on stereotypes. It’s as if the person said, “Rough play is only for boys; since I’m not interested, I must actually be a girl, because girls don’t do that kind of stuff.”
My second paragraph — where you claim to perceive a contradiction — is based on the simple biological fact that men don’t get pregnant. That’s not a stereotype at all.
I understand what you’re saying perfectly, and your dichotomy depends on the same stereotypes you accuse transpeople of holding.
There are a _lot_ of reasons why someone might point to gendervariant behavior or separation from other kids in childhood as an indicator of trans identity. The reasoning I’ve heard most often is a reversal of yours: gendervariant behavior is an _effect_, not a _cause_. It’s not, “I hate football, ergo I am secretly a woman,” it’s, “I felt like a girl inside and therefore decided from a very young age that I had to hang out with girls and do girl things. Even then, I knew I was different and behaved accordingly.”
>>My second paragraph … where you claim to perceive a contradiction … is based on the simple biological fact that men don’t get pregnant. That’s not a stereotype at all. >>
_Trans_men do get pregnant. I can name three childbearing men off the top of my head, not counting Nick. I know a much longer list of guys who plan to get pregnant in the future. Saying that no one who can get pregnant can be a man, or that transsexuals and transgendered people are not “genuine men” is just as oppressive and sexist as saying that the inability to catch a ball is prima facie evidence of womanhood. You say that would be sexist for Nick to extrapolate Nick’s love for football into an objectively male identity, but you have no problem at all with feminizing Nick because Nick is having a baby.
Niels writes:
>>It’s as if the person said, “Rough play is only for boys; since I’m not interested, I must actually be a girl, because girls don’t do that kind of stuff.”
I don’t really want to get involved in this debate, but this isn’t what niels meant and I think you know that. I’m going to go out on a limb and say he meant that males could not get pregnant. That’s not sexist. That’s biology.
Of course, the problem (as always in these debates) is that for some man=male human/ woman=female human and for others man/woman has more to do with identity than biology.
j-ha writes:
>>I’m going to go out on a limb and say he meant that males could not get pregnant. That’s not sexist. That’s biology.>>
If the federal government and the state of my birth say i’m male (i have both a birth certficate and a passport to prove this) and I can get pregnant, what biology are we talking about here?
>>I don’t really want to get involved in this debate, but this isn’t what niels meant and I think you know that. I’m going to go out on a limb and say he meant that males could not get pregnant. That’s not sexist. That’s biology.>>
If that’s so–and I don’t see much reason to believe it is, since he doesn’t seem inclined to give any credence to transgender gender identity–then he should own his transphobic language, and stop using “genuine men” and “men” as a synonym for “‘men’ exclusive of anyone not assigned male at birth.”
>>what biology are we talking about here?>>
This is a good point. Exogenous hormones cause biological changes, too.
Niels,
Sorry about the post with your name in it. It was much longer[I did adress it to you]. I thought I submitted it but I somehow managed to lose it.
Let me regroup and repost.
Thanks.
Jay
OK, so the government says that gays and lesbians can’t be married. So if I’m commited to my partner of 9 years, we have two children, own a home together, love each other and had a ceremony with our friends and family years ago where we voiced our commitment then I’m still not married cuz the government says I’m not. The fight for gay marriage isn’t a fight for certain legal rights, it’s a fight for me to be allowed to commit myself to one woman for the rest of my life. I can’t do it now. Nope.
Forgive the sarcasm because, like I said, this is not a debate I want to get into, but males cannot get pregnant. Period. There is nothing anti-trans about saying that. If, according to your ideas, man=identity and not biology then, yes, a man can get pregnant. Our ideas of what man/woman mean are different and I take it from your last post that we also differ on how to define male/female. Fine.
You get that Jay and I are both transsexuals but are not in fact the same person, right? I don’t take governmental recognition as prima facie evidence of reality. Remember, though, that most governments, ours included, require a great many biological changes to take place prior to a change in legal gender identity.
>>Our ideas of what man/woman mean are different and I take it from your last post that we also differ on how to define male/female. Fine. >>
Well, yeah, we do. I define “male” and “female” in such a way as to include transpeople, which means that some of the _male_ people I know can indeed get pregnant. You don’t agree, and define “male” and “female” in such a way as to exclude transpeople. From the tone of your post, I guess we also disagree on the definition of “anti-trans” and “transphobic.”
“Biology” and “fact” are such loaded terms, it is easy to see how people come to the conclusion that men/males can’t get pregnant.
The “biology” that defines human remains complicated and is only now slowly beginning to be understood. Most people think that “biology” is chromosomes. But then we have something like 23 varieties of sex chromosomes that occur naturally.
Then we have the “biology” of gestational hormones, which add an additional set of spices to chromosomes.
Further the range of hormones has significant overlap between the two “sexes.”
Let’s not forget the “biology” of “desire,” “gender,” “roles” etc. And then there are “gonads.” But some folks have ambiguous gonads from birth.
Science is socially constructed. “Facts” become facts over time and after much debate. Remember the whole earth is flat debate? Or the supposition that human genomes varied widely from other genomes? (had to drop that supposition when we found we only differ with the fruit flies something like 1%).
I bring up all of these things because “biology” is as loaded a term as any. People yammer on about chromosomes without ever having had a genetic test in their life, and rely instead on what the doctor told them when he or she looked between their legs at birth. Then say, “all men are xy” or “males can’t get pregnant.”
Well, they can. Our imagination and practices are not limited by people’s narrow language and understandings of the human condition.
The fact that our lives do not fit in the “it is isn’t sexist, it’s biology” argument says nothing about us or our choices. Forcing us into a box doesn’t change the truth.
>>I bring up all of these things because “biology” is as loaded a term as any.>>
Especially when used in such a way as to render all transitioned bodies artificial. It’s a contentious statement at best to assert that either Jay or I are _biologically_ female.
I really don’t want to get into this but I did want to say:
Piny, I know you and Jay are different. My post was solely in response to him. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
Also, I know that insinuating that I’m trans-phobic is a nice way to discredit and shame me, but I don’t want you to think that it worked. I’m not taking part in this thread because, as you’ve demonstrated, any attempt to talk about trans politics that is critical in any way is generally met with “TRANS-PHOBE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” I want every person to be free from fear of violence and to have full rights under the law. Just because my particular feminist politics and my ideas of gender conflict with *some* of what you think about gender doesn’t make me a bigot.
Jay:
I hope you’ll understand that, while I appreciate what you’ve written, I just don’t have the energy to do this again. I’ve been online for a while and have seen dozens of these debates happen. They always follow the same script and generally do nothing but cause bad feelings all around. So I’m bowing out.
>>OK, so the government says that gays and lesbians can’t be married. So if I’m commited to my partner of 9 years, we have two children, own a home together, love each other and had a ceremony with our friends and family years ago where we voiced our commitment then I’m still not married cuz the government says I’m not.
(snip)
…Males cannot get pregnant. Period. There is nothing anti-trans about saying that.>>
Is it anti-gay of the government–or for wingnuts–to define marriage as one man and one woman, and to say that gay people therefore cannot get married, period? Does this definition of marriage rest on assumptions about what qualities are most important that you see as heterosexist or limited? Or is it just a difference of opinion that has no effect on your life at all, a totally rational viewpoint that doesn’t indicate a deeper thread of sexism and homophobia?
>>I want every person to be free from fear of violence and to have full rights under the law. >>
As a feminist and (I’m assuming) a lesbian-rights activist, you should be well aware that this question and questions about terminology and biological determinism are inseparable. Thanks so much for having my back on the whole murder-bad thing, but that’s not enough.
>>I’m not taking part in this thread because, as you’ve demonstrated, any attempt to talk about trans politics that is critical in any way is generally met with “TRANS-PHOBE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” >>
I won’t insinuate, then, and I won’t shout. You are transphobic. Your beliefs are transphobic. They are inimical to transpeople, myself included, and they rest on assumptions about what is and is not important to gender that exclude and marginalize transpeople. You might not hate us, and you might not want us out of your neighborhood, and you might even have lots and lots of trans friends, but that’s not the only form prejudice can take and you know it. I doubt you hesitate to refer to “trans politics” as anti-feminist–and you definitely didn’t hesitate to shut me down here, as (a) a “trans politics” drone and (b) a knee-jerk tranny-card playing bigot.
What is absolutely needed to become pregnant is a uterus, which so far as I know, has never been successfully transplanted for the purpose of bearing a child. Saudi doctors have transplanted a uterus into a woman who had undergone a hysterectomy, but there is extreme doubt that her uterus will “work” as required for a full- or near full-term pregnancy.
Any other purported “essential” can be supplied exogenously.
Personally, I think it’s okay to use the terms male and female with reference other than to chromosomes and gonads, but it is an extremely confusing use of language, given the current state, and even if you want the current state of affairs to change I think a certain amount of definitional predicate would go a long way to making the discussion more understandable. I’m still a little confused, perhaps because I honestly don’t know (not well anyway) any transgendered people.
I yearn for the days when “misandrist” was the slur of choice. It would fit in nicely here, in this conversation. “Men can’t lactate you say?? MISANDRIST!”
Lilith: Funnily enough, reading your comment hasn’t made me feel nostalgic in the slightest. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Barbara, I don’ t have a problem with differentiating physically, politically, or experientially between transpeople and non-transpeople of the same gender (although the people generally so eager to do _that_ have a suspiciously easy time equating ftms with women and females, and mtfs with men and males). And I don’t have a problem with using different words to describe us. I _do_ have a problem with acting as though the chromosomal definition of “male” and “female” is one with which all reasonable people reasonably agree, or acting as though trans_male_ people and trans_female_ people don’t exist, or cannot be men and women respectively. Niels’s terminology, and j-ha’s, doesn’t include transpeople as exceptional, but forgets them altogether.
I have an even bigger problem with people who adopt, for whatever reasons, definitions of “male” and “female” that render transpeople and their identities invisible who then act as though it’s below the belt when transpeople call them anti-trans or transphobic. Deciding that sex assigned at birth, or physical sex pre-transition, is the deciding factor in determining gender has a lot of really important negative ramifications re: transpeople and their lives. Like it or not, they extend to “equal rights under the law” issues.
>>Lilith: Funnily enough, reading your comment hasn’t made me feel nostalgic in the slightest. Quite the opposite, in fact. >>
Just forget I said this, please? I’m having a bad day, and I’m sorry I was snippy.
I guess I don’t see what the big deal was with what you said, but whatever.
OK, so the government says that gays and lesbians can’t be married.
The government says gays and lesbians (and lest we forget, bisexuals) can be married, just not to people of the same sex. This isn’t pedantry; this is the reason why anti-same-sex marriage laws are unlawful discrimination.
I think that’s missing her point, though. She’s not saying there isn’t discrimination. She’s just saying that the fact of legal discrimination isn’t going to stop her from forming a lifelong partnership with another woman. The definition of marriage provided by the federal government isn’t the only one that matters, or the definitive one.
j-ha: there’s a very useful term that for all I know you may never have come across before: bio-male. I think it’s what you mean when you say male as in “males cannot get pregnant”. If you’d said “Bio-males cannot get pregnant: it’s a biological fact” there would have been no argument and certainly no cries of “transphobe”.
The problem is, if you set male=bio-male, you’re saying that transmen aren’t male. As Jay pointed out, there are many ways to define male, and some of them do indeed include transmen. By insisting that bio-male is the only reasonable meaning of male, you’re inflicting your version of their identity and failing to respect their own self-definition.
I’m sorry that you feel it’s not worth participating in the discussion and that you feel unjustly accused. FWIW, I don’t think transphobe necessarily=evil: a lot of it arises out of simple ignorance that can easily be dispelled if both sides are prepared to have an honest dialogue.
j-ha wrote:
>>Jay:
I hope you’ll understand that, while I appreciate what you’ve written, I just don’t have the energy to do this again. I’ve been online for a while and have seen dozens of these debates happen. They always follow the same script and generally do nothing but cause bad feelings all around. So I’m bowing out.
j-ha,
Again with this submit comment problem. I write a tome and get Cliff Notes.
Anyhow, thanks for being honest about bowing out.
My wrap-up on this topic:
People provide explanations for things in ways that support their particular world view.
Where world views collide, problems arise. What is so troublesome about transphobia on the left, for me at least, is that I fall prey to the belief that people on the left should know better.
Alas, my problem, I know. I mean we have people who can discuss the most arcane details of the IMF or Karl Rove’s cheats and lies, who, when it comes to trans folks lives, simply fall in line with basic pop science and a few feminists theorists. No questioning of the agenda behind such beliefs or even a questioning of how we came to believe such things in the first place.
And what is the worst, for me, is that we are not listened to. But then I see how the right – if I am to go by the posts to this blog – treats issues of importance and life to people posting on this blog, and I think, the cycle repeats itself.
We all want to be right. We grow up in a culture where everyone, from the TV anchorperson to adverts to doctors to teachers to parents are “experts” about our lives. So why wouldn’t we think we are “experts” about other peoples lives, especially people with whom we have little or no contact? That trans people suffer a National Geographic like existence through the mechanism of academic theories only makes the situation worse, I think.
But in the end, I’m glad people put themselves out here. Piny is awesome in his lightening quick read on transphobia. Much faster than I and a great teacher. Nick is brave (despite protests to the contrary) and wonderful and reminds about grace and graciousness.
j-ha and Niels thanks. You both remind me about my own edges and discomfort. Your beliefs enrage me because a part of me still believes I have no right to exist; or that I shouldn’t exist; or that I am a freak. Your words remind me to treat myself kindly and with compassion and to remember that I live and exist outside all linguistic and scientific frameworks.
Despite our theoretical yearnings, I cannot be reduced to a series of linear explanations about my life. Neither can anyone else.
Thank goodness for that.
Rock –
Sarah, Again, your ability to express concepts is amazing.
“(don’t get me started on how sexuality and cultural narratives enter into all this).” Where and when do we get to hear this?
Thanks for the compliments Rock, but remember, I’m only approaching this from a theoretical angle, and at best a research angle, but Jay, Piny and Nick are LIVING this, and their voices of experience hold far more weight than my academic one, as much as I adore playing with gender theoretically.
But as to cultural narratives and the intersection of gender and sexuality, as much as I would love to post about it here, personally I think it’s much better that I don’t hijack the thread, as this discussion of the ins and outs of transphobia is something that NEEDS to be discussed here, as honestly it doesn’t get brought up enough. Further, I think it’s incredible that we have three transMEN here, as (while completely valid and needed) transwomen often dominate trans discussions simply because of numbers. Bravo guys.
Lilith, *my* point is that language is important, and as long as we talk about “gay marriage” or say “lesbians and gays can’t marry,” we a) obscure a lot of other issues, such as the status of transgender persons–some states recognize them as their post-transition gender and some don’t, and b) we weaken our arguments for same-sex marriage.
I’m a biologist by trade, and I have no problem with the idea that men can get pregnant. (Congratulations, btw, Nick.) Biology is a big area, and it fits easily around notions of gender identity. I like Nick’s term “bio-male” as a way to defuse the situation, though.
Also, props to piny for the perfect pocket picture of transphobia.
Pingback: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » What Would the Virgin Mary Do?